This is historical material, "frozen in time." The web site is no longer updated and links to external web sites and some internal pages will not work.

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of Science and Technology Policy

For Immediate Release

May 7, 1998

Statement of

Dr. Duncan T. Moore,

Associate Director for Technology

Office of Science and Technology Policy

Before the

House Committee on Science

May 6, 1998

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:

First, let me say that I am pleased to appear before the Committee
in my capacity as Associate Director for Technology in the Office of Science
and Technology Policy.

One of the things I have noticed in my first four months in the job
is the strong degree of bipartisan support that exists for our national
science and technology programs. Mr. Chairman, the Administration very
much appreciates the leadership role that you and other members of this
Committee have played in this context. I look forward to working with you
and the Committee not just on this issue but on the range of important
technology policy issues that face our nation.

Mr. Chairman, 1998 promises to be an exciting and challenging year for
the International Space Station (ISS) program. The U.S. node was delivered
to the Kennedy Space Center over nine months ago and is undergoing final
testing for launch. Other key elements, including the truss and mating
adapters, have also been delivered to the Cape. The Integrated Electronics
Assembly is now being outfitted at Kennedy and we expect the U.S. lab and
remaining flight hardware for the first six flights to be delivered by
the end of 1998. At present, over 250,000 pounds of U.S. flight hardware
has been built; that figure will nearly double by the end of the year.
Under Mr. Goldin's leadership and through the efforts of thousands of dedicated
civil servants and contractors, the International Space Station is finally
becoming a reality. While these indicators are clearly encouraging, we
are also keenly aware of the challenges that lie ahead.

To a large extent, the greatest challenge has been and will continue
to be bounding risk within acceptable levels of funding and finding the
right balance between the two. This is never an easy calculation to make
when it comes to building space hardware. As much as we think we know about
conquering the space frontier, there have been and will continue to be
unknown design challenges that we must confront and overcome. In this respect,
we have to occasionally remind ourselves that this is a development program.
We are trying to do something that has never been done: combine the scientific
and technical expertise of 15 nations into a unified, orbiting space station
for world class research in space. As an engineer, I believe future generations
will come to appreciate not only the unique research it will enable, but
also the sheer amount of technical knowledge and experience we gained as
a nation in building the facility.

As you know Mr. Chairman, the President's FY99 request provides multiyear
funding through advanced appropriation for the ISS with assembly beginning
in FY98 and ending in 2003. The budget request included additional funding
in FY99 and the outyears totaling $1.2B. The decision to request additional
funding in the President's FY99 budget was based on the belief that we
should fix problems up front in the program and not wait until later, when
they may cost more. We believe this is the right move and acknowledges
the challenges we face in maintaining prime contractor performance, the
need to accommodate unforeseen changes, the importance of restoring reserves
to an acceptable level, and the need to initiate work on a crew return
vehicle.

Another challenge we face is managing the ISS partnership in the most
efficient and economical way. For the most part, NASA's international partners
in the ISS are meeting their obligations on time and on schedule. Again,
by the end of 1997, our partners had completed over 100,000 pounds of flight
hardware with another 50,000 pounds expected to be complete by the end
of 1998. To date, this represents an approximate investment of over $4.5
B in international contributions to the program in addition to the value
of Russian contributions. This picture has not always been perfect. We
have experienced schedule and cost impacts due to delays in the Russian
Service Module. While Mr. Goldin's testimony can go into the details on
this issue, I want to emphasize a couple of points.

First, from the beginning, our interest in bringing Russia into the
International Space Station was based on the belief that their years of
experience in operating the Mir space station and extensive background
in human space flight could bring scientific and technical benefits to
the program. That view has not changed. The first phase of our ISS cooperation
with Russia--the Shuttle/Mir program--has taught us about operating and
maintaining a space station. We've gained important insights into long-duration
flight and have effectively trained our ground controllers for the type
of coordination between the U.S. and Russia that will be needed for the
ISS. These are benefits that are already flowing into the ISS program and
with continued Russian participation will benefit the partnership.

As you know Mr. Chairman, that participation has at times been at risk,
largely due to problems that the Russian government has had in adequately
funding their own space agency. The Administration has been very engaged
in reinforcing NASA's communications to their Russian counterparts on this
point. The Administration has taken every appropriate opportunity to underscore
with the Russian leadership the critical importance of Russian funding
for the Service Module. Last month, this message was again conveyed by
U.S. Ambassador James Collins to President Yeltsin's government. We have
seen some progress in the right direction. Recent statements by President
Yeltsin committing the government to fully fund the space program are encouraging
but, as I think we all agree, "the proof is in the pudding."

Last week, NASA completed a General Design Review in Moscow with the
Russians which focused on relevant design and schedule issues related to
the Service Module. We will continue to insist that the Russian government
meet their obligations. NASA is assessing the design review data in detail
and, consistent with the timeline outlined in Mr. Goldin's statement, they
will make a judgement on whether and how to best use the Interim Control
Module. This is a decision that NASA will make based purely on cost, schedule
and technical requirements.

Mr. Chairman, NASA continues to be a symbol of the nation's future in
science, technology and space exploration. Beginning this year, in partnership
with 15 other nations, we will begin to assemble a new research center
in space, the International Space Station. When complete, I am confident
it will open new avenues of scientific and technical discovery that we
can't fully imagine today. I look forward to that time and to working with
you and the Committee as we move forward.